Sakmongkol answers Rocky Bru- Corrupting use of anonymity.

Corrupting use of anonymity

Friends have called me. They are saying- sakmongkol, habis lah you kali ni. Rocky Bru, the boss of bosses of Blogdom has joined in to hantam you. I wish I can say, I am shaking in my boots. He has come out with ground rules of blogging.

When I reached home, I look up my computer. I read Rocky Bru's take on my article concerning two bloggers which resulted in unintentional effects. Whether anyone believes its unintentional is not relevant to me. It's done and cannot be undone.

Well, my response is, I can accept this form of criticism which distinguishes itself from the many comments and even articles taking the form of childish tantrums which remind me of something that have passed through a cat's digestive system. Indeed some of the comments at the said Rocky article displayed these characteristics. Some stated what can you expect from a KJ supporter, supporter of perasuah etc etc.

One commentator who of course choose to remain anonymous, said he/she is sorry to have to take sakmongkol off his blog reading list. I must thank this person because after coming to my home and enjoying my hospitality, the person is being civil by announcing he/she wants to exit. So I say Godspeed.

Here is my way to answer what Rocky has said. It is done in my own style, in my poor English.

Media people flamboyantly professed levels of transparency. I say flamboyant, because many claim they have a higher commitment to transparency. 'Politicians' have none. They are not shy to boast about it sometime.

That claim however is not the exclusive province of media people as we shall see later. It is the same with causes. Some causes are purely hatched in the imagination of internet writers. The same causes hatched originally in the minds of writers are hyped over several times and eventually become elevated to the status of a greater cause. In our case, 'a national cause'. In the name of national cause for example, one Rashid Yusof loses a legitimate opportunity to 'cari makan' to feed his family.

The validity of the greater cause however is founded on references to 'sources within the establishment'. Hence we hear the oft repeated 'taichi' excuses of I stand by my source/s.

This is the tricky part. Now who judges the validity of these sources and even their authenticity? It's done by the very same writers (in the loosest of sense) who originated the cause in the first place. The writers themselves become victim of self hype.

Take the case for example of treating the halt of one Rashid Yusof as press secretary to the DPM. His halt to a legitimate expectation of a job is justified as being the result of fighting for a greater cause.

But, his legitimate expectation is never inferior to the equally legitimate expectation to 'cari makan' as the term is employed by those who arrogate to themselves the righteous role of defending 'a greater cause'. Tell me readers, how is it possible to destroy another person's legitimate expectation while hanging to our own claim, susah cari makan. Who judges our own periuk nasi is more important than another's?

But that is ok so it is argued because it is justifiable in the name of a greater cause. The whole thing is part of the process of being transparent and upfront.

Except, this self claim is most of the time founded on expediencies. The claim is enhanced and fortified by reliance upon one of the most un-transparent political weapons:  namely, disseminating to the public -- typically through sympathetic journalists/writers and even bloggers -- purely partisan assertions while hiding behind a journalistically baseless grant of anonymity.  Again and again, partisan assertions are hooked up to the claim of a greater cause

There are numerous manipulative and distorting effects from having cyber-writers make pronouncements while remaining anonymous. One of these and a most significant of reasons is that there is no accountability whatsoever when they make false or misleading statements. 

Today we have a perfect illustration of that lack of accountability. Anonymity is most used as a means of deception or using anonymity to reach an agenda couched in the now already tired phrase of 'a greater cause' or 'national interest'.

To be continued.